Why?

You have yet to even define science and religion to show that they are indeed different.  And I avoid reason! What a laugh. You have more faith in your worldview than the average flat earther has in his.

Simply stating "science is not religion" shows us nothing. I have supported my claim with facts, reason, citations, and common sense. All you have done is stuck your fingers in your ears and said "Nya nya nya the earth is a globe nya nya nya Science is not a religion."

Quote from: John Davis on June 23, 2016, 10:05:51 AM

You have yet to even define science and religion to show that they are indeed different.  And I avoid reason! What a laugh. You have more faith in your worldview than the average flat earther has in his.

Simply stating "science is not religion" shows us nothing. I have supported my claim with facts, reason, citations, and common sense. All you have done is stuck your fingers in your ears and said "Nya nya nya the earth is a globe nya nya nya Science is not a religion."

Have given examples, you just ignored them.

I know you are not going to change your mind. You are not going to see the oxymoron being in your being upset over science being a religion (it is NOT) while calling for science to more religious.

God is NOT hidden for those that can see Him. Your Biblical interpretations are a bid odd in my view. And outright nuts,when it comes to FET. But you have a right to your opinion, so have at it. However I still have hope that your heart will be opened, and your blindness cured. I pray for it. God's creation of the Universe is AWESOME. And God gifted us with the tools to see it all the way back to the beginning. The heavens shout the Glory of Creation and the love of God for us. 

Frankly, I don't have time to debate a mind closed to the glory of God.

Quote from: Round and Proud on June 23, 2016, 03:37:10 PM

Quote from: John Davis on June 23, 2016, 10:05:51 AM

You have yet to even define science and religion to show that they are indeed different.  And I avoid reason! What a laugh. You have more faith in your worldview than the average flat earther has in his.

Simply stating "science is not religion" shows us nothing. I have supported my claim with facts, reason, citations, and common sense. All you have done is stuck your fingers in your ears and said "Nya nya nya the earth is a globe nya nya nya Science is not a religion."

Have given examples, you just ignored them.

I know you are not going to change your mind. You are not going to see the oxymoron being in your being upset over science being a religion (it is NOT) while calling for science to more religious.

God is NOT hidden for those that can see Him. Your Biblical interpretations are a bid odd in my view. And outright nuts,when it comes to FET. But you have a right to your opinion, so have at it. However I still have hope that your heart will be opened, and your blindness cured. I pray for it. God's creation of the Universe is AWESOME. And God gifted us with the tools to see it all the way back to the beginning. The heavens shout the Glory of Creation and the love of God for us. 

Frankly, I don't have time to debate a mind closed to the glory of God.

you interpret the bible to your own mis understanding..

you are very hypocritical because you judge others for the way they see a bible. and yet you do the same..

when i told you that you are taking someone elese book and using it for your own benefit you denied that..


you are not accusing someone else of doing the same thing..

you don't want anyone to tell you that you are mis informed..
you don't want anyone to tell you that the bible is not for you, speaking to you, for you to understand
you don't want to know your truth in the book of life..

you are only knowing what you have been told which was a lie.

in your bible those black....men of the 12 diciples go on to say, beware for wolves will come and take what is ours and spread it across the world to deceive the world.. and no offense to you, because you can change,
but you are doing that very thing..

using a bible verse to further your points is contradicting the fact that you shouldn't even be using the bible to prove a point because you are not suppose to be reading it anyways.

as far as God goes, you can believe in their God.. nothing wrong with that.. but you can not make up where you are in the story.. because then you are creating a false witness, not only of yourself but of others..

you need to stop.. you don't even really know what you are praying to.

Have given examples, you just ignored them.

I know you are not going to change your mind. You are not going to see the oxymoron being in your being upset over science being a religion (it is NOT) while calling for science to more religious.

God is NOT hidden for those that can see Him. Your Biblical interpretations are a bid odd in my view. And outright nuts,when it comes to FET. But you have a right to your opinion, so have at it. However I still have hope that your heart will be opened, and your blindness cured. I pray for it. God's creation of the Universe is AWESOME. And God gifted us with the tools to see it all the way back to the beginning. The heavens shout the Glory of Creation and the love of God for us. 

Frankly, I don't have time to debate a mind closed to the glory of God.

• They advance in similar ways, including mysticism
• They both attempt to explain the world
• Both use logic, sense experience, and knowledge available at the time to do so
• Both require use of unprovable points to maintain consistency
• Both often have those who follow rotely and dogmatically to further its advancement

Your idea of mystic seem to cover every form of inspiration. The mind is never asleep, it is always working on problems, even if the person is unaware of the effort.

I am a writer, I was blocked for an idea. One way to help with that, is to write a random sentence. I stared at that sentence for a long time. NOTHING. Around 2:30 in the morning, I was wide wake with a short story based on the sentence. Now I am now 40k words into a book length story. it was NOT mystical or supernatural, it my my subconscious mind working on it while I did other things.

I see no reason for those working in science to be any different than the rest of us.

• Thomas Kuhn points out that 'normal' science requires faith as an indispensible tool, as the majority of 'normal science' requires it to define the puzzles which are solved
• Planck points out that faith is necessary in science
• The Existence of a Principle of Induction must be Taken on faith and is unprovable (due to infinite regression via Hume, Popper, et al.)
• Godel showed us we can't have a formal system that is coherent, and yet science is attempting to be that - this requires faith to practice science

• • Thomas Kuhn points out that 'normal' science requires faith as an indispensable tool, as the majority of 'normal science' requires it to define the puzzles which are solved

• Religion and science are two distinct issues - Soul and Physical Universe respectively
• Science relies on validation through experimental results versus and with Mathematical Validation; presumably religion does not
• Importance is put on Accuracy of Prediction in Science
• Religion and Science should and will remain separate
• The Bible defines faith as  "Faith shows the reality of what we hope for; it is the evidence of things we cannot see."

Quote from: John Davis on June 23, 2016, 10:05:51 AM

I have supported my claim with facts, reason, citations, and common sense.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhhhhh!!
[inhale]
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!

Sigh...
Whatever you say John. 

Quote from: Blue_Moon on June 23, 2016, 02:09:15 PM

Quote from: John Davis on June 23, 2016, 10:05:51 AM

I have supported my claim with facts, reason, citations, and common sense.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhhhhh!!
[inhale]
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!

Sigh...
Whatever you say John. 

Glad to see you bringing your normal level of reason and logic to the conversation as a counter-point. Like the child who cannot address an argument, you simply put your fingers in their ears, laugh, shit your pants, then claim triumph.[/list]

Quote from: Round and Proud on June 23, 2016, 03:37:10 PM

Have given examples, you just ignored them.

I know you are not going to change your mind. You are not going to see the oxymoron being in your being upset over science being a religion (it is NOT) while calling for science to more religious.

God is NOT hidden for those that can see Him. Your Biblical interpretations are a bid odd in my view. And outright nuts,when it comes to FET. But you have a right to your opinion, so have at it. However I still have hope that your heart will be opened, and your blindness cured. I pray for it. God's creation of the Universe is AWESOME. And God gifted us with the tools to see it all the way back to the beginning. The heavens shout the Glory of Creation and the love of God for us. 

Frankly, I don't have time to debate a mind closed to the glory of God.

You make the claim "You posit science is working to hide God and supplant religion". I do no such thing. As said, I explain that many believe this is the case, and I am speaking to all the possible reasons that flat earthers believe in.

You claim I say: "then say what is needed is for science to become a religion". I do not. I say Science is a religion.

In these cases your fallacy is misrepresenting my argument and attacking strawmen.

Your argue my heart is closed to religion; I'm upset science is a religion. Neither of these are true. I'm simply stating the facts as I see them. None of this is relevant. My personal position does not change the position of the argument. Whether my eyes are closed to religion or God does not affect the argument either way and you are simply attacking the man.

Here are the points I argue:
Compared Science and Religion:

• They advance in similar ways, including mysticism
• They both attempt to explain the world
• Both use logic, sense experience, and knowledge available at the time to do so
• Both require use of unprovable points to maintain consistency
• Both often have those who follow rotely and dogmatically to further its advancement

This is how I evidenced them:

1. They Advance In Similar Ways, Including Mysticism

I cited many examples. You then cherrypick a few of them that come about through dreams here:

Quote from: Round and Proud on June 22, 2016, 05:48:31 AM

Your idea of mystic seem to cover every form of inspiration. The mind is never asleep, it is always working on problems, even if the person is unaware of the effort.

I am a writer, I was blocked for an idea. One way to help with that, is to write a random sentence. I stared at that sentence for a long time. NOTHING. Around 2:30 in the morning, I was wide wake with a short story based on the sentence. Now I am now 40k words into a book length story. it was NOT mystical or supernatural, it my my subconscious mind working on it while I did other things.

I see no reason for those working in science to be any different than the rest of us.

You make an argument that has nothing to do with the point: "I see no reason for those working in science to be any different than the rest of us." Indeed I don't either.

So you attack a strawman argument after cherrypicking it out of the sea of evidence I provided.

Recognizing I had not defined mysticism so we can know what I"m talking about I go ahead do so:

William James, an expert on Religious Experience defines Mystical Experience as the Following: (and supports this definition over many lectures at Cambridge now in print in the Variety of Religious Experiences)
Transient — the experience is temporary; the individual soon returns to a "normal" frame of mind. It is outside our normal perception of space and time.
Ineffable — the experience cannot be adequately put into words.
Noetic — the individual feels that he or she has learned something valuable from the experience. Gives us knowledge that is normally hidden from human understanding.
Passive — the experience happens to the individual, largely without conscious control. Although there are activities, such as meditation (see below), that can make religious experience more likely, it is not something that can be turned on and off at will.

Indeed the large majority of the experiences I listed fit the bill. Not all, since I did provide this definition after the fact. Certainly we can't dismiss all of them. For example, Tesla and Roger Penrose's, or many of the others which are explicitly religious  or mystical in nature.

You have no response and instead sit on your cherry picked strawman from your previous point.

2. They both attempt to explain the world

This point appears to not be contested.

3. They both use logic, sense experience, and knowledge of the time to do so

This point appears to not be contested.

4. Both require use of unprovable points to maintain consistency

I supply the following evidence:

• Thomas Kuhn points out that 'normal' science requires faith as an indispensible tool, as the majority of 'normal science' requires it to define the puzzles which are solved
• Planck points out that faith is necessary in science
• The Existence of a Principle of Induction must be Taken on faith and is unprovable (due to infinite regression via Hume, Popper, et al.)
• Godel showed us we can't have a formal system that is coherent, and yet science is attempting to be that - this requires faith to practice science

Your reply:

"Science, is NOT faith" Fallacy of Definition
I avoid doing math, experimentation Ad hominem
I deny medicine electronics, chemistry Ad hominem
I have Hellenologophobia - the worst on the planet Ad hominem

And finally something somewhat legitimate at least a Bible Quotation About Faith "Faith shows the reality of what we hope for; it is the evidence of things we cannot see."


5. Both often have those who follow rotely and dogmatically to further its advancement

• • Thomas Kuhn points out that 'normal' science requires faith as an indispensable tool, as the majority of 'normal science' requires it to define the puzzles which are solved

Again, not contested.

Now to your arguments:

• Religion and science are two distinct issues - Soul and Physical Universe respectively
• Science relies on validation through experimental results versus and with Mathematical Validation; presumably religion does not
• Importance is put on Accuracy of Prediction in Science
• Religion and Science should and will remain separate
• The Bible defines faith as  "Faith shows the reality of what we hope for; it is the evidence of things we cannot see."

Can we agree these are your points? I'm more than happy to change my mind, but I doubt you have the ability to argue your point well enough to change anybodies mind. I've changed my mind over issues many times in the past here when I found them untenable. Before I continue, I'd like to know you are still in the discussion and would like me to address your point. Like you, if your mind is too closed to be changed - I have little interest arguing over a discussion I've clearly won.

Quote from: Blue_Moon on June 23, 2016, 02:09:15 PM

Quote from: John Davis on June 23, 2016, 10:05:51 AM

I have supported my claim with facts, reason, citations, and common sense.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhhhhh!!
[inhale]
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH!!!!

Sigh...
Whatever you say John. 

Glad to see you bringing your normal level of reason and logic to the conversation as a counter-point. Like the child who cannot address an argument, you simply put your fingers in their ears, laugh, shit your pants, then claim triumph.[/list]

Hide the word of God

Feedback - what the heck? Why would you engage looney toons like this? When you're a confirmed fruit loop, there's not much point in trying to help unless you are a licensed psych. Nothing that you quoted would give me anything other than much sorrow for people so disconnected from reality. Some use drugs, others pagan myths, others mood music. Its all the same. Just an attempt to swim against the flow because they can. I say, leave them to their fantasies.

You really have issues reading. As I said here, in this thread, somebody asked me why they would do this. I did not say they were doing this, but I gave one of the reasons I feel is heavily cited. As Secretary of the Society I must often talk to many points of view under our umbrella belief.

That is one of the common answers so I supplied it. I didn't move the goalpost, you were ignorant of where the goalpost was in the first place due to your inability to follow the thread by assuming my belief without foundation.

However, your retreat is telling.

Another Victory for Flat Earth! Globs who have admitted that Science is a Religion through retreat through defeat: 2

To hide the word of god from us

Why?

Whatever floats your boat. This post is a lie. Anyone reading this thread can see it.

Your FIRST response was

Quote

To hide the word of god from us

It took you 12, TWELVE posts into the this thread, before you walked back  your first sentence in your first post about Why. And you walk back is lame.

Quote

That is one of the common answers so I supplied it

Man up and admit you believed it when you posted it, and you believe it now. It was the FIRST LINE of your FIRST response. IT was not watered down with, "This is a common answer..." or another attempt to distance you from YOUR response.

So now, a dozen posts later by you, we get a weak kneed, "Well, look, I didn't mean to imply I believe what I said, its just well, others have said they believe, and will being who I am and all, well I just had to post that.

As far as retreating? Don't you wish. Pastor Fred is correct, though, debating with someone that cannot admit to their own words and meanings is a waste of time, effort and energy. Now if that, in your mind, makes you think you some how won this, I can live with that. Hell, that is papa's entire universe, I am sure he can find room for more.

Do you think that leaders who say the Earth is round are just misguided, or is it a conspiracy of sorts?

Many in our group would point to a planar conspiracy. They would cite the map the United Nations choice[sic] for their logo and various Cold War narratives to justify an Illuminati group is hiding the truth. Some even say I am a member of the illuminati, acting as controlled opposition.

To me this seems a bit misconceived, however I can hardly discount their view in whole as it must have some worth. In general, I’d rather assume error over malice.
...

I’d like to think that the leaders are simply looking at reality from a different angle than I am. And that’s good. There is much use to the other angle. However, far greater use is to be found in recognizing that there are more angles. Take the early success of science by the Ancients due to the multitude of schools of thought. Even today we can note the persistence of the sacred in an age where information attempts to make everything mundane.

Is there a grand conspiracy to make us believe the planet is a sphere and who is involved?

To me the question is whether it’s a conspiracy or simply a conspiracy of dunces. That being said, the wide majority of flatists believe in a conspiracy to hide the flat stationary earth. If there is a conspiracy, very few people would need to be involved. Often folks give wild estimates for the numbers of conspirators, but in the end only a few key positions would be held by those interested in hiding the truth due to the compartmentalised nature of space development and engineering. You’d hardly tell the cafeteria worker at NASA about the true shape of the Earth, would you?

Many of NASA’s experiments have nothing to do with Aeronautics and Space, so obviously those studying in other fields would also not need to be involved. This does raise the question: what business does NASA have studying climate change?

Quote from: Round and Proud on June 26, 2016, 12:10:44 PM

Whatever floats your boat. This post is a lie. Anyone reading this thread can see it.

Your FIRST response was

Quote

To hide the word of god from us

It took you 12, TWELVE posts into the this thread, before you walked back  your first sentence in your first post about Why. And you walk back is lame.

Quote

That is one of the common answers so I supplied it

Man up and admit you believed it when you posted it, and you believe it now. It was the FIRST LINE of your FIRST response. IT was not watered down with, "This is a common answer..." or another attempt to distance you from YOUR response.

So now, a dozen posts later by you, we get a weak kneed, "Well, look, I didn't mean to imply I believe what I said, its just well, others have said they believe, and will being who I am and all, well I just had to post that.

As far as retreating? Don't you wish. Pastor Fred is correct, though, debating with someone that cannot admit to their own words and meanings is a waste of time, effort and energy. Now if that, in your mind, makes you think you some how won this, I can live with that. Hell, that is papa's entire universe, I am sure he can find room for more.

Its irrelevant which I listed first, and its irrelevant if I believe it (I happen not to.) I am happy to stand by my words. You unfortunately are so full of yourself you think you know my intent better than I do myself.

Here is an interview I did recently for Paste Magazine. In it do you think I speak to my belief in a Flat Earth Conspiracy?

Quote

Do you think that leaders who say the Earth is round are just misguided, or is it a conspiracy of sorts?

Many in our group would point to a planar conspiracy. They would cite the map the United Nations choice[sic] for their logo and various Cold War narratives to justify an Illuminati group is hiding the truth. Some even say I am a member of the illuminati, acting as controlled opposition.

To me this seems a bit misconceived, however I can hardly discount their view in whole as it must have some worth. In general, I’d rather assume error over malice.
...

I’d like to think that the leaders are simply looking at reality from a different angle than I am. And that’s good. There is much use to the other angle. However, far greater use is to be found in recognizing that there are more angles. Take the early success of science by the Ancients due to the multitude of schools of thought. Even today we can note the persistence of the sacred in an age where information attempts to make everything mundane.

Do you think here I believe in the various Cold War narratives? No. Of course not.

Here's one even more recently from The Tab:

Quote

Is there a grand conspiracy to make us believe the planet is a sphere and who is involved?

To me the question is whether it’s a conspiracy or simply a conspiracy of dunces. That being said, the wide majority of flatists believe in a conspiracy to hide the flat stationary earth. If there is a conspiracy, very few people would need to be involved. Often folks give wild estimates for the numbers of conspirators, but in the end only a few key positions would be held by those interested in hiding the truth due to the compartmentalised nature of space development and engineering. You’d hardly tell the cafeteria worker at NASA about the true shape of the Earth, would you?

Many of NASA’s experiments have nothing to do with Aeronautics and Space, so obviously those studying in other fields would also not need to be involved. This does raise the question: what business does NASA have studying climate change?

If you've listened to or read any of my interviews you'd know I often find myself having to speak to many of the beliefs of those in my organization such as the dome model, the infinite plane model, my relativistic model, and the Rowbothamic model. I talk of the conspiracy minded flatist, the religious flatist, and the 'run of the mill flatist'.  As you can see from my answers even to the original post - they are not consistent and spread the whole spectrum of belief. You saw the religiously minded one and jumped at it, presumably because you are bigoted towards religious fundamentalist Flat Earthers - so I defended it.

People come here, such as the OP, to understand our beliefs. I present our beliefs. I've made it very clear I don't believe in a conspiracy on many occasions, though lately I've been on the fence. I certainly don't believe in a religious conspiracy as you seem to be claiming I do (without any evidence other than you taking one of my answers out of context.)

I was asked why someone would do this. I gave the answers. If somebody asks "why would somebody believe the Earth is flat" I also have given a wealth of reasons - most of which are not even relevant to my beliefs or my model. If somebody asks "why do you believe the earth is flat" though, my answer is different or "what do you believe" or "What is your model?"

Its not a lie at all - you lost this thread, this argument, and you look silly. You are the one that assumed things. Any reasonable person reading this post will see I backed up my argument while you did nothing but run and cry supporting your nonsense with nonsense view after nonsense view while misrepresenting my own view. Your poor Pastor must realize this and rightfully suggests you should work on your book.

You misunderstood and now are taking it out on me.

Whether or not Science is a religion and the motives of the conspiracy are two separate points and admit-ably we derailed the thread a bit. Whether it should be a religion or not I suppose is a matter of personal opinion. Note, this is the same argument made in the other thread. You are the one that assumed my views were something they weren't.

This is likely because you are prejudiced. You saw a flat earther and was like "Oh a biblical fundamentalist. Dur hur hur. I clearly don't have to bring REASON or EVIDENCE to my arguments here."

Not only this, but this little troll tactic has not gone unnoticed. It is clear I have answered the question speaking to three points of views. The Religious, The Orwellian, and The Cold War Conspiracy. You've been here long enough to know these are three separate distinct views, so stop lying to your poor Pastor.

I am more than happy to stand by my words and beliefs, which is what I'm doing here. Forever will we remember concerning this thread:

Another Victory for The Flat Earth.

So interviews etc, even other threads your responses explain what you believe and what you are repeating of others. But in THIS thread, you didn't find it necessary, even after you where called on it in the next post?  That is took you a dozen posts, before you thought to say, "Oh wait, I posted it, but I never said I believed it."

This would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic and sad.

Also: Dozen of posts? I answered as soon as it was brought up by Bullwinkle.

Look how the round earther squirms when he first finds out he was beaten by a flatist. What a spectacle!

   Now, are you just going to whine about you presuming my beliefs without asking or do you have anything useful to add to the discussion before we again declare this a

VICTORY FOR THE FLAT EARTH - VICTORY FOR THE FLAT EARTH - VICTORY FOR THE FLAT EARTH - VICTORY FOR THE FLAT EARTH

To hide God? seriously? That has to be the  most stupid thing I have heard in my 62+ years of life.

Please explain how the shape of the world hides God or has any effect on John 3:16 or any other part of being Christian?

In my opinion, and I am far from alone in it, the expanse of the universe is a magnificent testament to His creation. I am in AWE of Him every time I see the night sky. Hide God? the concept would be laughable, if it was not so completely mind bogglingly tragic. I grieve at depth of your blindness. But pray for your sight to be returned.

Power? That is almost as RBSC as hiding God. How can one gain power on a flat earth but not on a round? And Oil is oil is oil FET or RE it is STILL there, still looked for, still drilled for, still refined, still used as a major source of energy and still being paid for.

Your response is.... is.... is as unfathomable as it is tragic. Beyond words it is.

The Word of God clearly talks about a flat earth. The move to make science a religion and to delegitimatize the holy word starts with the flat earth.

I am more representing the view than I am claiming proof. Many (and many of our past presidents) have stated this. I believe in God, more so than many of the most devout due to my experience - but I find his proofs are far more relevant and far more plentiful than a conspiracy. When somebody asks me why flat earthers believe "so - and - so" I must tell them why flatists believe so-and-so.

Quote from: John Davis on June 17, 2016, 10:16:41 AM

To hide the word of god from us.
To maintain legitimacy of rule after faking the moon landing (and then realizing the earth was flat)
Money, oil (the Antarctic!), Power in knowledge

To hide God? seriously? That has to be the  most stupid thing I have heard in my 62+ years of life.

Please explain how the shape of the world hides God or has any effect on John 3:16 or any other part of being Christian?

The whole hide God thing seems silly to me.

It makes much more sense to control people with religion than science.  Much easier to get people to do things based on faith than logic.

So we have a conspiracy trying to hide God.  Which means "they" believe god exist, but trying to hide it from others.

"They" could control the Church and what is taught.  Just look at history when religion had a lot of control.

So when someone questions "them" that person would be questioning God.

How better to convince people there is a God then a geocentric, flat Earth that is special since everything else observable are spheres. Put a dome on it and it is even more convincing.

I will say science is like a religion, in the way of don't go against the general consensus. Also when there is an agenda behind the test, it becomes much less about the results and much more about the agenda there of.

I went against many things in college and made no friends at it. I knew what my strengths were mentally so I used them fully, examined the ACTUAL test and not the conclusions. No matter how solid my evidence was that argued the conclusion, I was met with anger and resentment, very rarely and actual rebuttal.

Same with me believing in Yahweh, I was a complete idiot for that. No matter my standings in my class or my accomplishments. The more years I was in, the less theist there were. By the end of my stay, I was one of two, she was ridiculed just as much as I. I have even lost a few customers because of my beliefs, it is what it is. 

There are many many similarities of science when compared to religion. I hate this, as I rely on the scientific method in my profession, as well as I enjoy it personally.  Sure I hate failure when something does not work, however I forget all about it when a couple redesigns later it works like a charm. No matter what something is, there is always a group out there that is using it to their advantage for power and control.


As to religion being able to control some one better than science I have to disagree. With science there is something religion does not have. We can PROVE IT!!! That is the first word out of anyone's mouth if you question anything scientific. Even if it hasn't been proven, or the test was a farce ect ect, it doesn't matter. Not only that, they are shamed for being stupid and not believing. GO BEAT ROCKS TOGETHER CAVE MAN! Its no different than being called a witch or a sinners and being shamed in front of everyone. Example of this, evolution is a FACT, even though its barely a theory (just an example as it is fresh on the mind). This is how this happens...this is also why science can surpass religion in control. At the end of the day, religions rely on faith.

To hide the word of god from us.
To maintain legitimacy of rule after faking the moon landing (and then realizing the earth was flat)
Money, oil (the Antarctic!), Power in knowledge

Prove that YOUR god is real and mine arent.

I really would like someone to explain this, clearly, coherently, sensibly:

There have been lots of scientific notions that have, eventually, been cast aside when the evidence against them became overwhelming.
Assuming the Flat Earth is true and the Round Earth is false, why, why, why are all the governments and all the scientists and all the academic institutions perpetuating the notion of a round earth and going to elaborate (and very expensive) ends to fake evidence for a round earth and deny a flat earth.

Who benefits from this hoax?  Who is kept in subjugation by it?  Who is enriched by stories of a round earth at this late date when virtually all the world talks round earth so that whatever money there is in it is spread so thin?  Surely maintaining such a hoax into the 21st century would become more and more difficult and costly.

Edward Hendrie, in his 2016 book, The Greatest Lie on Earth: Proof that Our World is Not a Moving Globe, attributes the denial of FE to a vast Zionist-Jewish conspiracy, although I honestly cannot fathom how promoting a round earth benefits Jews above others.  Nor does Hendrie point to any passage in Judaic literature that says that the Earth is flat but will be presented as round to non-Jews.   So I'd really  like a clear explanation for the reasons why a Round Earth hoax is still being perpetuated.

Assuming the Flat Earth is true and the Round Earth is false, why, why, why are all the governments and all the scientists and all the academic institutions perpetuating the notion of a round earth and going to elaborate (and very expensive) ends to fake evidence for a round earth and deny a flat earth.

Apparently NASA is embezzeling the money they're given. Instead of going to space they're just siting in their facilities spending the money on bullshit.
Not that you can't literally aim a directional radio antenna made out of a Pringles can into basically any direction and pick up a signal from thousands of satellites orbiting the Earth.
They're all just sitting in front of their computers making bullshit up. And whenever you ask simple but important question - there is always silence or the answer is CONSPIRACY.

Sure you don't mean a "Triddles can" . He seems to (think he knows ALL about) "photons" and those "thingos"!

- why are THEY all complicit with NASA??  Even the USSR's and China's programs?